As Darren Carty reports in our Focus section this week, just over 1.8m cattle were traded through livestock marts in 2017. While this is the highest number traded over the past decade, the headline figure covers up a number of concerning trends. One is the loss in market share. Ten years ago, between 75%-80% of cattle sold live off farms were traded through marts. In 2017, this had reduced to 55%-60% due to a sharp increase in farm-to-farm trading.
There are a number of obvious factors at play, including the development of digital technologies that have facilitated increased farm-to-farm trading.
Alongside this, changing farmer demographics has at one end of the spectrum seen part-time farmers become more reliant on agents in the procurement of stock. At the other end, more intensive dairy farmers are opting to offload calves directly off farm rather than going to the mart (more Friesian-bred animals are now traded farm-to-farm than traded through marts).
At the same time, marts are also coming under increased cost pressure. A number of serious accidents at mart facilities has not only seen insurance costs soar but also the need for major investment in facilities to improve health and safety practices. Alongside this, the availability and cost of labour is having an impact.
The mart business is a low-margin one where throughput is critical to economic viability. Yet if we look at the figures, based on a total of 90 marts, the average throughput of cattle at each centre is just 20,000 per annum, or 400 head per week. There are no figures for sheep throughput. With a small number of larger marts having a much greater share of the market, the vast majority of marts in the country are trading significantly below this figure.
The difficult question is whether having 90 marts in the country best serves the long-term interests of the mart system. Mart rationalisation has proven to be a thorny issue. There have been a number of false dawns with merger talks having collapsed without agreement.
However, the scenario we have playing out in Castleblayney, where the collapse of the mart has left 80 farmers owed €160,000, should refocus minds. This form of rationalisation is hugely damaging to a mart system where its greatest asset with farmer clients is security of payment. Anything that undermines this will only put further pressure on market share, driving more farmers in the direction of farm-to-farm sales.
The average throughput of cattle at each of the country’s 90 marts is just 20,000 per annum, or 400 head per week
While increased regulation is often seen as a hindrance to business, the Property Services Regulatory Authority (PSRA) has an important role in protecting the integrity of the mart system – but only if there is a level playing field. The situation where Castleblayney Livestock Mart continued trading without a licence cannot be repeated. Financial and health and safety regulations must be applied equally across all marts.
We should also ask if the current structure best serves farmers. The fact that over 1.3m head are now traded farm-to-farm would suggest farmers are voting with their feet. While marts are responding with an enhanced range of services, delivering these services while remaining economically viable is a challenge.
So, what does the future hold? Clearly there is a need for leadership on the issue of rationalisation. In some cases, rationalisation will mean closure of facilities but in others collaboration between marts would greatly enhance services. In such instances, smaller centres could act as collection centres for stock to be moved to larger trading venues with better facilities and a greater range of buyers. Such a model could also lend itself to developing the producer group concept promoted by Minister for Agriculture Michael Creed in relation to giving individual farmers more power when dealing with meat processors.
Given the importance of the services provided, the future of the livestock marts deserves a national strategy. Government policy should be aligned to delivering the desired outcome. After all, Government cannot afford to ignore the risk of having 1.3m head of stock traded through a farm-to-farm system that is neither financially regulated nor transparent.
Budget 2019: shouldering the cuts but seeing no benefit from economy upturn
Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe will be under pressure to deliver for farmers in Budget 2019.
The IFA launched its pre-budget submission in Dublin on Wednesday. We carry a piece by the association’s newly appointed economist Dr Edel Kelly this week.
In it, Kelly highlights the extent to which farm incomes have lagged behind the national industrial average over the past three years, with earning opportunities 33% greater outside of agriculture.
The article reinforces the view of farmers that the sector has failed to see any benefit from the upturn in the national economy despite having been at the coalface in terms of budget cuts during the recession.
The upcoming budget serves as an opportunity for Government to address the serious income challenges facing farmers in the wake of a very difficult year and – in the longer term – the impact that a potential cut to the CAP budget could have on farm incomes, combined with the fallout from Brexit.
Ironically, it now looks likely that the low-interest loan scheme announced by the Government in the 2018 budget will not have been delivered in advance of the 2019 budget announcement.
Given the cashflow challenges created by a costly spring followed by an equally difficult summer grazing period, the delays are putting further pressure on farmers. Farmer attention will also focus on the introduction of an income deposit scheme to reflect volatility in farm incomes in recent years – we understand it is receiving a positive hearing within the Department of Finance.
Meanwhile, the IFA has put delivery of a €200 per cow payment centre stage in its pre-budget submission. In her piece, Dr Kelly highlights that when off-farm income is excluded, just 20% of cattle-rearing farms are viable.
Tillage: it’s time for the EU to upgrade laws on biotechnology
An international conference on plant biotechnology taking place in Dublin this week showed the capability of these technologies and displayed just how much EU citizens and producers are missing out on.
The recent decision by the European Court of Justice has clarified that gene-editing technologies are governed by current EU law and so, very many of the technologies being discussed cannot currently be used in the EU.
This is a great shame given that so many of the research areas discussed have the potential to bring direct benefits to human health and the environment.
Now that the current legislative process has been clarified, the Commission and the European Parliament need to upgrade current GMO legislation to reflect the capability of modern technologies. This must be one of the few areas EU legislation – if not the only one – that has not been upgraded on a regular basis since its introduction.
EU society is entitled to avail of the potential benefits of these many technologies for its citizens, its environment and its food producers. There is still a need for sensible regulation and controls but surely it is time to end this stagnation in a sophisticated society in a technologically advancing world.
Energy: could co-op structure help renewables?
Farmers are frustrated with the lack of Government support for farm-level renewable schemes.
Also this week, Thomas Hubert reports on Tuesday’s Energy in Agriculture conference in Gurteen College. It was more subdued than previous years, with farmers frustrated at the lack of Government support for farm-level schemes and delays in grid connections. What is clear is that the Government’s focus is on incentivising larger-scale projects that can hit the ground running and make a significant impact on achieving renewable energy targets quickly.
If farmers are to compete or partner with multinationals and semi-state agencies, they need to do so as a group that can deliver scale with the skillset to overcome technical barriers. We should look to the farmer-led co-op model as a means of delivery.
Read more
Unpaid farmers seek legal advice on mart regulator's 'duty of care'
Big players before farmers in renewable energy acceleration
As Darren Carty reports in our Focus section this week, just over 1.8m cattle were traded through livestock marts in 2017. While this is the highest number traded over the past decade, the headline figure covers up a number of concerning trends. One is the loss in market share. Ten years ago, between 75%-80% of cattle sold live off farms were traded through marts. In 2017, this had reduced to 55%-60% due to a sharp increase in farm-to-farm trading.
There are a number of obvious factors at play, including the development of digital technologies that have facilitated increased farm-to-farm trading.
Alongside this, changing farmer demographics has at one end of the spectrum seen part-time farmers become more reliant on agents in the procurement of stock. At the other end, more intensive dairy farmers are opting to offload calves directly off farm rather than going to the mart (more Friesian-bred animals are now traded farm-to-farm than traded through marts).
At the same time, marts are also coming under increased cost pressure. A number of serious accidents at mart facilities has not only seen insurance costs soar but also the need for major investment in facilities to improve health and safety practices. Alongside this, the availability and cost of labour is having an impact.
The mart business is a low-margin one where throughput is critical to economic viability. Yet if we look at the figures, based on a total of 90 marts, the average throughput of cattle at each centre is just 20,000 per annum, or 400 head per week. There are no figures for sheep throughput. With a small number of larger marts having a much greater share of the market, the vast majority of marts in the country are trading significantly below this figure.
The difficult question is whether having 90 marts in the country best serves the long-term interests of the mart system. Mart rationalisation has proven to be a thorny issue. There have been a number of false dawns with merger talks having collapsed without agreement.
However, the scenario we have playing out in Castleblayney, where the collapse of the mart has left 80 farmers owed €160,000, should refocus minds. This form of rationalisation is hugely damaging to a mart system where its greatest asset with farmer clients is security of payment. Anything that undermines this will only put further pressure on market share, driving more farmers in the direction of farm-to-farm sales.
The average throughput of cattle at each of the country’s 90 marts is just 20,000 per annum, or 400 head per week
While increased regulation is often seen as a hindrance to business, the Property Services Regulatory Authority (PSRA) has an important role in protecting the integrity of the mart system – but only if there is a level playing field. The situation where Castleblayney Livestock Mart continued trading without a licence cannot be repeated. Financial and health and safety regulations must be applied equally across all marts.
We should also ask if the current structure best serves farmers. The fact that over 1.3m head are now traded farm-to-farm would suggest farmers are voting with their feet. While marts are responding with an enhanced range of services, delivering these services while remaining economically viable is a challenge.
So, what does the future hold? Clearly there is a need for leadership on the issue of rationalisation. In some cases, rationalisation will mean closure of facilities but in others collaboration between marts would greatly enhance services. In such instances, smaller centres could act as collection centres for stock to be moved to larger trading venues with better facilities and a greater range of buyers. Such a model could also lend itself to developing the producer group concept promoted by Minister for Agriculture Michael Creed in relation to giving individual farmers more power when dealing with meat processors.
Given the importance of the services provided, the future of the livestock marts deserves a national strategy. Government policy should be aligned to delivering the desired outcome. After all, Government cannot afford to ignore the risk of having 1.3m head of stock traded through a farm-to-farm system that is neither financially regulated nor transparent.
Budget 2019: shouldering the cuts but seeing no benefit from economy upturn
Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe will be under pressure to deliver for farmers in Budget 2019.
The IFA launched its pre-budget submission in Dublin on Wednesday. We carry a piece by the association’s newly appointed economist Dr Edel Kelly this week.
In it, Kelly highlights the extent to which farm incomes have lagged behind the national industrial average over the past three years, with earning opportunities 33% greater outside of agriculture.
The article reinforces the view of farmers that the sector has failed to see any benefit from the upturn in the national economy despite having been at the coalface in terms of budget cuts during the recession.
The upcoming budget serves as an opportunity for Government to address the serious income challenges facing farmers in the wake of a very difficult year and – in the longer term – the impact that a potential cut to the CAP budget could have on farm incomes, combined with the fallout from Brexit.
Ironically, it now looks likely that the low-interest loan scheme announced by the Government in the 2018 budget will not have been delivered in advance of the 2019 budget announcement.
Given the cashflow challenges created by a costly spring followed by an equally difficult summer grazing period, the delays are putting further pressure on farmers. Farmer attention will also focus on the introduction of an income deposit scheme to reflect volatility in farm incomes in recent years – we understand it is receiving a positive hearing within the Department of Finance.
Meanwhile, the IFA has put delivery of a €200 per cow payment centre stage in its pre-budget submission. In her piece, Dr Kelly highlights that when off-farm income is excluded, just 20% of cattle-rearing farms are viable.
Tillage: it’s time for the EU to upgrade laws on biotechnology
An international conference on plant biotechnology taking place in Dublin this week showed the capability of these technologies and displayed just how much EU citizens and producers are missing out on.
The recent decision by the European Court of Justice has clarified that gene-editing technologies are governed by current EU law and so, very many of the technologies being discussed cannot currently be used in the EU.
This is a great shame given that so many of the research areas discussed have the potential to bring direct benefits to human health and the environment.
Now that the current legislative process has been clarified, the Commission and the European Parliament need to upgrade current GMO legislation to reflect the capability of modern technologies. This must be one of the few areas EU legislation – if not the only one – that has not been upgraded on a regular basis since its introduction.
EU society is entitled to avail of the potential benefits of these many technologies for its citizens, its environment and its food producers. There is still a need for sensible regulation and controls but surely it is time to end this stagnation in a sophisticated society in a technologically advancing world.
Energy: could co-op structure help renewables?
Farmers are frustrated with the lack of Government support for farm-level renewable schemes.
Also this week, Thomas Hubert reports on Tuesday’s Energy in Agriculture conference in Gurteen College. It was more subdued than previous years, with farmers frustrated at the lack of Government support for farm-level schemes and delays in grid connections. What is clear is that the Government’s focus is on incentivising larger-scale projects that can hit the ground running and make a significant impact on achieving renewable energy targets quickly.
If farmers are to compete or partner with multinationals and semi-state agencies, they need to do so as a group that can deliver scale with the skillset to overcome technical barriers. We should look to the farmer-led co-op model as a means of delivery.
Read more
Unpaid farmers seek legal advice on mart regulator's 'duty of care'
Big players before farmers in renewable energy acceleration
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: